Proposal to establish an NALC Seminary

[Mel Harris]

       Now that this forum seems to again be accepting new posts, I would like to hear what many of you think about the following: 

       The NALC Convocation next month will consider a proposal to establish an NALC Seminary.  Information about this is on pages 4 through 10 of the July 2013 issue of the NALC News.  If I understand this correctly, the seminary as proposed would consist of a Seminary Center at Trinity School for Ministry and some Houses of Study (one of which may already be operating at the Charlotte, North Carolina campus of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.)

       I was aware that there was an NALC Task Force for Theological Education working on a proposal.  I had little idea of what would be in this proposal until I read the issue of the NALC News (linked to above).  I would greatly appreciate reading any comments that any of you are willing to make about this proposal.

       (If this forum crashes again in the near future, you can blame it on my starting this thread.      )

       Thank you,

                             Mel Harris

[Team Hesse]

We who are students, faculty, staff, and Board at ILT are disappointed and in all honesty, feeling betrayed by this action from NALC. We thought our attempts to build a seminary experience were addressing NALC needs. So much so that NALC was offered and placed one of their own, Rev Jim Lehman on the ILT board. ILT has a faculty that is 100% Lutheran, unlike the places that are being touted as "house of Studies" locations. For the student who is looking for a residential experience, there is the community in Brookings and arrangements are in process. And we are approaching accreditation. So much for avoiding redundancy and being good stewards....


We will soldier on.


Lou 

[Pilgrim]

Tim notes: I would hope the term 'betrayal' would simply be a temporary feeling unrelated to the task of theological training. The impression I have is that accreditation was/is first priority in harmony with an orthodox faculty, both of which appear to be met. ILT, at my reading, will certainly be a part of the mix, but lacking the accreditation at this point was problematic.

[Team Hesse]

Tim notes: I would hope the term 'betrayal' would simply be a temporary feeling unrelated to the task of theological training. The impression I have is that accreditation was/is first priority in harmony with an orthodox faculty, both of which appear to be met. ILT, at my reading, will certainly be a part of the mix, but lacking the accreditation at this point was problematic.

It is my prayer that "betrayal" will be indeed temporary, but there is no point to denying this reality at the current time when so many have worked so hard and sacrificed so much to make this seminary a reality.


Lou

[Charles_Austin]

I've been rather impressed by what I have read about ILT and seen in its online course offerings and I notice its distinguished faculty. And I notice that it is geographically located more in the center of Lutheranism in this country, rather than in Pennsylvania and North Carolina.
I also wondered whether the "Anglican" (that is emphasis on bishops) aspect of the Pennsylvania school might be a problem for some Lutherans.
But all those things are up to you folks.

[J. Thomas Shelley]

To establish a house of studies at an existing Seminary within the Great Tradition is far better stewardship than engaging in capital campaigns in order to erest a new brick and mortar institution.

Few institutions represent the Great Tradition as well as Trinity.

All one needs to do is to enter the main building from the parking lot and observe the mural depicting giants of the faith, beginning with the Apostles and early missionaries and extending to the 20th century.  You will find +Augustine and +Boniface as well as Luther.  Yes, a host of Anglican as well, but if we are honest our histories are closely intertwined, even on this continent.

Then observe this Seminary community at prayer.  Formation in Daily Prayer is expected, as the institution is on virtual shut-down during Morning and Evening Prayer while nearly everyone gathers in the Chapel.

These folks are excellent stewards of the Great Tradition and of the means of grace. 

Blessed is the NALC leadership for discerning so wisely!

Full disclosure:  The congregation that I serve sends two months worth of what was Mission Support in our ELCA days to Trinity School for Ministry.

[Team Hesse]

(this post written by Debbie Hesse, board member at the Institute of Lutheran Theology)

Thank you, Charles.  It has been a lot of hard work on behalf of a very small number of dedicated folks, and without the direct support of any one particular Lutheran denomination, but ILT has become a place where preachers are formed.  Well.

As to this proposal;  I don't understand.  How does sending Lutheran students to Anglican seminaries assure congregations that when they call a pastor they can feel confident that pastor has had the curriculum that is commensurate with NALC mission and values (unless those values are Anglican)?

All instructors at ILT are Lutheran (ELCA, LCMC, LCMS, and even NALC), the programs are up and running, and accreditation is within sight (paperwork filed or will be filed this summer; then it is a matter of time to jump through all the hoops).  We have worked to build a quality education preparing Lutheran pastors for Lutheran congregations who are looking for Christ centered, mission driven, traditionally grounded, and confessionally focused pastors.  Any Lutheran congregation.  ILT is not "the LCMC seminary," although we have a lot of supporters in LCMC because they, too, are Christ-centered, mission-driven, traditionally grounded, and confessionally focused and can no longer trust the ELCA seminaries to provide pastors for their futures.  ILT is not sponsored by any one denomination, but rather teaches the core Lutheran doctrines that any Lutheran denomination's seminary would teach and all Lutheran congregations would expect ...

Yes, ILT is listed as another seminary NALC students might study at, but student attendance must be approved by the NALC candidacy committee on case by case basis.  That means it will likely not be an option that is suggested or encouraged.  I don't understand.  ILT already has most of what NALC says they they are looking for, including Dr. Bob Benne (teaching for several years now) and Dr. Yeago (one year teaching at ILT) along with many other fine teachers as Charles mentioned ...

I also think the congregations will be confused by this proposal, as many of them have been greeting people at our ILT displays at various gatherings with comments like "Yes! You are our seminary!"   ILT is not and has no plans to be a 'brick and mortar institution;'  there are plenty of those all across the country -- congregations that are the backbone of pastoral formation.  And while ILT does not currently have a traditional "residential program," there is really no reason it could not be done at Brookings, where ILT is headquartered and several faculty now live.  Times are changing -- a young person (or older one) can't simply leave job and family and change location 3 times in 4 years during seminary without disrupting their family life and ending up with a pile of debt.  The ILT experience provides an education -- and continuing education --  for those who seek the quality we can provide via online instruction, which allows us to choose from among the best Lutheran theologians out there.

www.ilt.org   
https://www.facebook.com/InstituteLutheranTheology
Check it out!

Debbie

[Pilgrim]

Tim wonders: First, I find value in what I read and see offered by ILT, and by the quality of faculty they have secured. I also see value in what the NALC is seeking to address: present accreditation, the residential (without investment in brick & mortar) in tandem with Houses of Studies (one is currently in develop here in the Houston area) that helps address the multitude of issues that face the "traditional model". And I see the NALC equally addressing the "Lutheran" component of quality faculty throughout the model. I'm somewhat disappointed in what I read as a defensive reaction by ILT to the proposal and the assumption that such a proposal is a direct reflection on what ILT offers. I hope that is not true by anyone.

The nagging in the back of my mind, however, prompted by Debby's note of "ILT not being the LCMC seminary" suggests that rather than a both/and approach, we are caught in the typical Lutheran either/or dilemma, which I would locate squarely in terms of ecclesiology. It has been an arena of debate and battle ever since the reformation era - and at its heart is the issue of authority and power, exercise by whom and how and on what basis, and further how that is best exercised to preserve the "one, true faith" amongst the broken and fallen (albeit it redeemed) Body of Christ called the Church.

Having history in the ALC, LCA, LCMS, ELCA and now NALC - most of the issues causing division over the course of the years, seem to find their way back to Ecclesiology, at least in part - what is the Church and how does the Church so organize to carry out the work with which we've been entrusted. I've found both blessings and banes in each of those Church bodies and in their attempts to exercise "oversight". I understand the hesitancy of the Pietists regarding hierarchy. I understand the hesitancy of those who for whom "congregationalism" is to be feared as a fissure in the catholicity of the Church.

My suspicion is that until and unless each various church body, instead of backing into it which seems to be our Lutheran habit, finally makes decisive its ecclesiology the either/or rather than some type of both/and dichotomy will continue ad infinitum.

[Team Hesse]

The nagging in the back of my mind, however, prompted by Debby's note of "ILT not being the LCMC seminary" suggests that rather than a both/and approach, we are caught in the typical Lutheran either/or dilemma, which I would locate squarely in terms of ecclesiology. It has been an arena of debate and battle ever since the reformation era - and at its heart is the issue of authority and power, exercise by whom and how and on what basis, and further how that is best exercised to preserve the "one, true faith" amongst the broken and fallen (albeit it redeemed) Body of Christ called the Church.

At least the elephant in the room has been named....


Lou

[Team Hesse]

I'm somewhat disappointed in what I read as a defensive reaction by ILT to the proposal and the assumption that such a proposal is a direct reflection on what ILT offers.

Keep in mind, what you have read so far (that you hear as defensive) is the opinion of just two people -- in the same household at that.  So the reaction is not one "by ILT," but by us as individuals, husband and wife, who have been long-time supporters of ILT and firmly believe in what is happening there, and were surprised at the proposal when we read it.  We had anticipated something else.

The nagging in the back of my mind, however, prompted by Debby's note of "ILT not being the LCMC seminary" suggests that rather than a both/and approach, we are caught in the typical Lutheran either/or dilemma, which I would locate squarely in terms of ecclesiology.

Quite possibly. 
It is, first and foremost however, a statement of fact since the LCMC, being congregational, doesn't have and doesn't intend to have their own seminary as far as I can tell, nor will they issue a blanket endorsement of just one as a recommendation to their congregations.  A district might, and Augustana District has, but not LCMC overall.  (There is a small LCMC seminary run by a handful of LCMC pastors; I think it is more of a certificate program, Beyond the River Academy.)  LCMC is an organization of congregations, so each congregation is free to choose the seminary it wants to support ... unlike NALC where the organization can call for all NALC congregations to support a particular existing seminary, or develop one of their own, and expect that congregations are more likely than not to follow their recommendation.   Formed as a seminary for all confessional Lutheran congregations, with ILT already in existence offering an education from highly qualified teachers without the expense of moving and/or the expenses associated with a building, we just don't see the need to do it again.  And I admit I am confused at how an Anglican seminary will produce confessional Lutheran pastors. 

Certainly the NALC is free to do what it feels a need to do, if that is how they want to spend the money the congregations are willing to provide.   ILT is still going to be doing what we do, and we are happy to accept NALC students who want what we can offer.  We look forward to full accreditation in 3-5 years and are very thankful for the students and supporters we have. 
Lutheran teachers for Lutheran preachers... ILT is here for your congregation.

DEBBIE

[GalRev83]

I have been chastised and threatened off list for some comments I made today, some meant lightheartedly. Apparently some folks will not tolerate joking about these matters. Therefore I have deleted my comments and will no longer participate in this discussion.

Pertinent parties are now on my ignore list.

Donna

[Rev. Spaceman]

My sense in reading the taskforce proposal is that they are open to flexibility for the future.  I understand the disappointment of ILT folks, but let's now think creatively about how to include ILT in the NALC seminary plan for the future.  I think if a residential option were in place as well as the accredidation, it would be a much different story.  So the goal now should be to engage the relevant persons in conversation about how ILT could become one of the "houses of study" that the proposal discusses.  With a little effort and willingness to listen on all sides, I think that could happen.  I plan on bringing it up at the convocation this August.  At the same time, we should be grateful for the opportunity that Trinity in Ambridge has extended.  For me it's not either/or but both/and.

[Team Hesse]

I have been chastised and threatened off list

-- For the record, since this is a public forum and I don't need anyone getting the wrong idea.  Again.

Chastised, yes;  threatened, NO.  I did ask for an immediate apology ... .... ...

Debbie

[Paul L. Knudson]

I have been trying to get my computer to download the whole newsletter, but I somehow cannot get past page 5, just the beginning of the presentation of the NALC Seminary proposal.  I share, Lou and Deb, your disappointment. 

I believe that the ecclesiology "elephant in the room" matter does play into this.  I am not happy with the sad reality that this matter seems intractable.  I fault both sides.  LCMC simply is not willing to recognize or move even a few steps to placate the concerns that more is needed than congregationalism without much of any structural organization at a national level. 

I work in the area of world missions with concerns in Ethiopia and cry out for some way to come together more effectively in LCMC to assist our brothers and sisters in places like Ethiopia.  I do think, however, that NALC has not seemed that patient either.  They are plowing ahead.

I guess that ILT will need to persevere and I hope look for more young professors, especially in exegetical studies.  Our youth director has been receiving excellent training at ILT and is soon ready for ordination. 

I just wish there was more hope for actual interaction on many levels between LCMC and NALC.  I think we in LCMC have to take responsibility for our part in the struggles on this.

[Charles_Austin]

Donna writes:
I have been chastised and threatened off list for some comments I made today, some meant lightheartedly. Apparently some folks will not tolerate joking about these matters. Therefore I have deleted my comments and will no longer participate in this discussion.
I comment:
Wow. What a pity!